So basically you want the government to save your ass and thus your cushy IT jobs?
For a minute there I thought you were an 80's industrial auto worker speaking there for a minute instead of a supposedly upwardly mobile highly educated IT professional.
So people who adopt are more selfless than those who do not? Adopted children cannot become status symbols? What about the celebrity parents who adopt 3, 4 or 5 kids and then bore the world by telling everyone over and over and over? Rosie O'Donnel, Mia Farrow...etc come to mind here.
Are you even TRYING to tell me that those who adopt children aren't trying to become "fullfilled"? You're daft if you actually believe that.
Lastly what the fuck is wrong with simply wanting to pass on your familial traits? Your family has existed for generations and all of a sudden it has to be the end of the line because you don't want to be seen as raising a "status symbol". Adopting children can be compared to buying children. So please don't try to make adoptive parents come across as "extraordinary" because they are anything but that.
I know this is Slashdot, and I know everyone here is supposed to be the cream of the crop when it comes to snobbery and elitism, but this Adoption over Fertility Treatment attitude really takes the fucking cake. You sir have raised the bar for all of us, and for that I thank you!
Thank you for letting us know that if we chose to strive for our own biological children instead of adopting the children of others that we are self-centered egotistical societal leaches. Thanks.
Has it ever occured to you that some people just aren't comfortable with adopting unknown children? You never know what you're going to get. The same could be said for biological children but it just doesn't "feel" the same. Studies should be done on the type of people who seem to have no problem just adopting any kid they happen across. My feeling is the research would show that those individuals are most certainly NOT normal people.
It tells us that the people legislating the limits on research are guided by outdated and unpopular paternalistic "morals" that only seek to restritct the behaviours of those they do not like.
Yeah playing God is bad. So lets all quit taking any vitamins, no more pain killers, no more anti-biotics and lets shut down all hospitals. Because if man's hand is involved we're "playing God"
Quit trying to make people feel guilty for not being poor and not wanting to save the world. Save your self-righteous rants for someone who gives a crap.
There's any number of reasons why people could be posting as AC. Maybe they don't feel like jepordizing their jobs just to make a comment on this relatively worthless (in comparison to keeping a job) site. This isn't a macho contest of who's brave enough to reveal their user names. All you need to see are the comments themselves, you do not need to know who is making them. I mean, fine I can see your user name, but what does that really tell me? Do I now know who you are or something? What separates you from an AC anyway?
You speak as if her point of view must obviously be the correct one. Aside from that, AC's have a good reason for not revealing their names. Some of them may still work for the company or for one of its clients. The entire reason why the AC option exists is so that people can speak up without identifying themselves. This is not a contest of who's brave enough to post with their name you know.
To keep it short its because of the GPL. The GPL license makes Linux the "One true Unix" that cannot be forked. Unix was already forked long ago and thats how we got AIX, Solaris, HP-UX, Tru64....etc. If they chose any of the BSD OS's it would just happen again specifically because the BSD license ALLOWS this to happen. The taking of source proprietary. With Linux the source CANT be taken propreitary. Each vendor is forced to play fair. Thus each vendor feels safer contributing. Its sort of like a unilateral disarmament confrence. No one is willing to disarm till the other guy does first. Using a BSD license wouldn't do anything to remove the atmosphere of fear and suspicion that one side might take the contributed code and benefit at the cost of the others.
There's nothing less accessible at all about whats going on. The "common man" off the street will be happy with just high speed access. They aren't the type that needs to be transferring 10gb/month worth's of files. Only GEEKS need that kind of capacity and since most people aren't geeks, there is no problem here. In fact since there will be lower prices for those who use less bandwidth this is making braodband MORE accessible to the common man.
Slashdot Mirror
And the phrase is "Moral Terrorism". You've just committed an act of it. Now knock it off.
So basically you want the government to save your ass and thus your cushy IT jobs?
For a minute there I thought you were an 80's industrial auto worker speaking there for a minute instead of a supposedly upwardly mobile highly educated IT professional.
None of that helped the MBA's at Enron now did it?
So people who adopt are more selfless than those who do not? Adopted children cannot become status symbols? What about the celebrity parents who adopt 3, 4 or 5 kids and then bore the world by telling everyone over and over and over? Rosie O'Donnel, Mia Farrow...etc come to mind here.
Are you even TRYING to tell me that those who adopt children aren't trying to become "fullfilled"? You're daft if you actually believe that.
Lastly what the fuck is wrong with simply wanting to pass on your familial traits? Your family has existed for generations and all of a sudden it has to be the end of the line because you don't want to be seen as raising a "status symbol". Adopting children can be compared to buying children. So please don't try to make adoptive parents come across as "extraordinary" because they are anything but that.
I know this is Slashdot, and I know everyone here is supposed to be the cream of the crop when it comes to snobbery and elitism, but this Adoption over Fertility Treatment attitude really takes the fucking cake. You sir have raised the bar for all of us, and for that I thank you!
Not everyone wants to adopt, nor should they be pressured into doing so.
If your body does not have the ability to see, you are not supposed to. (So the blind stay blind)
If your body does not have the ability to hear, you are not supposed to. (So the deaf stay deaf)
If your body does not have the ability to walk, you are not supposed to. (So the paralyzed remain crippled)
If your body does not have the ability to produce its own insulin, you are not supposed to. (So diabetics will just die)
I could go on and on but you get the point. Just because you do not "like" it that does not make it "wrong".
Thank you for letting us know that if we chose to strive for our own biological children instead of adopting the children of others that we are self-centered egotistical societal leaches. Thanks.
Has it ever occured to you that some people just aren't comfortable with adopting unknown children? You never know what you're going to get. The same could be said for biological children but it just doesn't "feel" the same. Studies should be done on the type of people who seem to have no problem just adopting any kid they happen across. My feeling is the research would show that those individuals are most certainly NOT normal people.
It tells us that the people legislating the limits on research are guided by outdated and unpopular paternalistic "morals" that only seek to restritct the behaviours of those they do not like.
Yeah playing God is bad. So lets all quit taking any vitamins, no more pain killers, no more anti-biotics and lets shut down all hospitals. Because if man's hand is involved we're "playing God"
Quit trying to make people feel guilty for not being poor and not wanting to save the world. Save your self-righteous rants for someone who gives a crap.
You call something that's put the fear in Microsoft, and rallied the combined forces of IBM, HP, Dell and Sun "shitty"? Hmmmmmm.
The guy has a CS degree. How much more "professional" as a programmer can you get?
There's any number of reasons why people could be posting as AC. Maybe they don't feel like jepordizing their jobs just to make a comment on this relatively worthless (in comparison to keeping a job) site. This isn't a macho contest of who's brave enough to reveal their user names. All you need to see are the comments themselves, you do not need to know who is making them. I mean, fine I can see your user name, but what does that really tell me? Do I now know who you are or something? What separates you from an AC anyway?
You speak as if her point of view must obviously be the correct one. Aside from that, AC's have a good reason for not revealing their names. Some of them may still work for the company or for one of its clients. The entire reason why the AC option exists is so that people can speak up without identifying themselves. This is not a contest of who's brave enough to post with their name you know.
What does being mugged have to do with anything?
So in other words you want ethical people working for you who will cause the company to go out of business?
When its time to make the monies, leave the morals at home.
This from a guy with a Flash heavy homepage.
Then why don't you find a new line of work?
You are a new type of moron. If you have a problem with geeks, then maybe you should stay away from geek SITES you stupid stupid fuck.
Any evidence to the contrary?
How impressive, a comment from an AC.
To keep it short its because of the GPL. The GPL license makes Linux the "One true Unix" that cannot be forked. Unix was already forked long ago and thats how we got AIX, Solaris, HP-UX, Tru64....etc. If they chose any of the BSD OS's it would just happen again specifically because the BSD license ALLOWS this to happen. The taking of source proprietary. With Linux the source CANT be taken propreitary. Each vendor is forced to play fair. Thus each vendor feels safer contributing. Its sort of like a unilateral disarmament confrence. No one is willing to disarm till the other guy does first. Using a BSD license wouldn't do anything to remove the atmosphere of fear and suspicion that one side might take the contributed code and benefit at the cost of the others.
I don't have any evidence to show you but yes its true and Woz has already long ago forgiven Jobs for it.
There's nothing less accessible at all about whats going on. The "common man" off the street will be happy with just high speed access. They aren't the type that needs to be transferring 10gb/month worth's of files. Only GEEKS need that kind of capacity and since most people aren't geeks, there is no problem here. In fact since there will be lower prices for those who use less bandwidth this is making braodband MORE accessible to the common man.
Unless you like movies about seemingly perveted obsessions with your mother.........